This paper proposes a conceptual definition that can used as a starting point to contextualize knowledge initiatives in international organizations and other types of non-profit organizations interested in knowledge management.
Organizational leaders, knowledge managers and consultants involved in creating and implementing knowledge management initiatives aimed at process improvements in international organizations context could benefit from the reflections and learning insights from this paper.
This paper does not address efficiency matters from the political or governing sphere, nor does it propose specific programmatic changes to work of international organizations; rather it presents a pragmatic “bottom-up” approach, based on case studies and interviews conducted at eight different international organizations, including the European Union (EU), the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the OPEC Fund for International Development (OFID), the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and were classified according to their functional orientation. Over 40 interviews have been conducted, with organizational leaders, knowledge managers, IT managers and human resources managers.
The grounded theory methodology as described by Strauss and Corbin [Strauss and Corbin, 1990, Strauss and Corbin, 1994], using interviews and document studies for data collection, combined with findings from literature, helped identify processes involved in managing knowledge in international organizations.
To obtain competitive advantage in Europe, it is crucial for small and medium sized enterprises (SME) to utilise knowledge efficiently and to enhance their innovation potential. Several national approaches of managing Intellectual Capital exist, but there is no European wide consensus or any empirical validity regarding managing Intellectual Capital. The different approaches have to be brought together and a suitable method for SME with minimum standards on the European level has to be developed. This paper shows existing approaches on measuring Intellectual Capital as well as the necessity of a European approach and the potential impact of an Intellectual Capital Statement (ICS) on the European level.
Since the mid 1990s various concepts of intellectual capital reports have been elaborated and their descriptions can be found in both scientific and management literature. Their major task is the attempt to cover intangible assets within an organization or firm and to illustrate the immense resources, which may be used to attain competitive advantages. A major drawback of all presented intellectual capital reports is their non-comparability due to the diversity of conceptions. Thus it is not possible to compare and evaluate the results of different firms within an industry using diverse concepts of intellectual capital reports. This paper presents an approach, which allows the creation of comparable intellectual capital reports based on so called meta-indicators (or benchmarks). By using the meta-modelling approach the intellectual capital reporting (ICR) benchmark framework and a top-down procedure model (the intellectual capital reporting (ICR) step model) are outlined and discussed in detail.
In recent years the possibility of applying knowledge management to logistics and to logistics planning has been put forward in literature. Despite of these discussions knowledge management has not been implemented in logistics in large scale. To draw a clear picture of the current state-of-implementation and understand the impact knowledge management activities have on a company’s logistics performance a comparative study is run with German and Portuguese logistics companies. The paper explains the theoretical background and practical implementation of this study and discusses a strategy to measure the investments in KM, access the needs of KM, and evaluate the impact of KM investments in the logistics sector. Although the study is still in progress, results are expected to be available for presentation at the conference.
Measuring knowledge related performance in organizations usually is conceptualized on the basis of a strategic resp. top down-approach of KM measurement. Unfortunately, such a strategic approach has some important disadvantages: (1) It is difficult to get commitment from senior managers regarding the investment into strategic KM projects; (2) Due to the complexity of the organizational system it is difficult to show the impact of KM on organizational performance; (3) Operational KM projects often are out of focus for top managers since decentralized activities seem not to have the potential to convince senior managers of the impact of KM on organizational performance. In this paper it is shown how the actual weaknesses of measuring knowledge related performance can be overcome by a knowledge related measurement- and monitoring-system. This will be made clear on a conceptual level as well as on the basis of a case study.
In accordance with the resource-based view and the activity-based view, sustainable competitive advantages are mainly due to core knowledge that, together with tangible and (especially) intangible resources, develops competitive products and services through the appropriate activities and processes of the value chain. Strategic Benchmarking of Intellectual Capital (SBIC) is a knowledge-based strategic management methodology and information system framework that has been built drawing direct inspiration from both the above-mentioned perspectives and tries to refine the classic strategic SWOT analysis. This paper carefully describes IICBS, one of the two versions of SBIC, and shows the main benefits to be obtained from the systematic use of IICBS. The SBIC has been tested and successfully implemented in more than forty European enterprises.
Profiting from Social Capital when Building Network Organizations
In knowledge economy, companies and organisations build sustainable competitive advantages not only relying on their internal intellectual capital but also on the intellectual capital of other companies, organisations and institutions and specifically on those of the cluster [Porter, 1990], microcluster or territory where the company is located. This kind of intellectual capital, basically external and of a relational nature is one of the main constituents of the networked organisation and (will be called) from now on Social Capital [Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998] because it is embedded in the social fabric (texture) of the nearby environment. SCBS (Social Capital Benchmarking System) is both a new management method and a new management tool, that identifies, audits and benchmarks the resources and capabilities or the social capital, existing in alternative cluster locations that are necessary in order to develop the specific network organisation that each particular business model requires. The system has been successfully piloted in five European enterprises.
Due to contradictory results obtained in Knowledge Management initiatives a model of audit is presented. The main action in the international project “Strateg” is the development and application of a model to diagnose and propose suitable recommendations concerning the management of knowledge and intellectual capital of a firm. A brief description of the model is presented after the exposition of its key scientific assumptions. Finally, the current state of the project is reviewed.
Based on the observation that on one hand a lot of knowledge management initiatives lack of a precise assessment of the relevant knowledge assets and that on the other hand actual concepts of knowledge audits lack of a sound theoretical basis, the aim of this paper is to describe the theoretical basics of such a knowledge audit: Its core idea lies in the integration of knowledge stock- and knowledge flow measurement. The concept of Intellectual Capital (IC) makes clear that knowledge measurement from this perspective deals with the measurement of knowledge stocks. Hence, the impact of IC investments at the beginning of a period can be identified in an increased knowledge stock at the end of the period. Unfortunately, IC measurement approaches do not provide managers with explicit recommendations on how to deal with the resource knowledge within a period. Hence, managers can be provided with knowledge flow measures in order to be able to manage the resource knowledge more specifically. A case study illustrates the benefits of knowledge flow measurement in order to plan and evaluate knowledge management projects explicitly.
KM is more an archipelago of theories and practices rather than a monolithic approach. We propose a conceptual map that organizes some major approaches to KM according to their assumptions on the nature of knowledge. The paper introduces the two major views on knowledge –objectivist, subjectivist – and explodes each of them into two major approaches to KM: knowledge as a market, and knowledge as intellectual capital (the objectivistic perspective); knowledge as mental models, and knowledge as practice (the subjectivist perspective). We argue that the dichotomy between objective and subjective approaches is intrinsic to KM within complex organizations, as each side of the dichotomy responds to different, and often conflicting, needs: on the one hand, the need to maximize the value of knowledge through its replication; on the other hand, the need to keep knowledge appropriate to an increasingly complex and changing environment. Moreover, as a proposal for a deeper discussion, such trade-off will be suggested as the origin of other relevant KM related trade-offs that will be listed. Managing these trade-offs will be proposed as a main challenge of KM.
The process of knowledge and intellectual capital management aims to improve organisational performance and efficiency. Knowledge is a distinct capability that contributes to the improvement of this efficiency. Learning is an integral part of the knowledge system and can be identified by deconstructing available organisational knowledge. This paper offers an interpretative perspective of knowledge and intellectual capital development; it also examines previously fractured contextual approaches to organisational management research, which often fail to include learning as a significant factor for both absorbing and recognising the knowledge capabilities of a firm. Based on the results from a study conducted across 140 companies as well as selected case studies, this paper investigates learning mechanisms and their role in building a firm’s knowledge capabilities. This paper argues that learning is an integral part of the knowledge process in which learning acts as an endogenous factor for the development, absorption and utilisation of knowledge. The search continues for an appropriate epistemological framework in the area of management research under which organisational learning theories can be analysed while simultaneously remaining relevant and useful to the pragmatics of organisational knowledge development.